High–Arctic aircraft measurements characterising black carbon vertical variability in spring and summer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. The vertical distribution of black carbon (BC) particles in the Arctic atmosphere is one of the key parameters controlling its radiative forcing. Hence, this work investigates the presence and properties of BC over the high Canadian Arctic. Airborne campaigns were performed as part of the NETCARE project and provided insights into the variability of the vertical distributions of BC particles in summer 2014 and spring 2015. The observation periods covered evolutions of cyclonic disturbances to the polar dome that caused and changed transport of air pollution into the High–Arctic, as otherwise the airmass boundary largely impedes entrainment of pollution from lower latitudes. A total of 48 vertical profiles of refractory BC (rBC) mass concentration and particle size, extending from 0.1 to 5.5 km altitude, were obtained with a Single–Particle Soot Photometer (SP2). Generally, the rBC mass concentration decreased from spring to summer by a factor 10. Such depletion was associated with a decrease of the mean rBC particle diameter, from approximately 200 nm to 130 nm at low altitude. Due to the very low number fraction, rBC particles did not substantially contribute to the total aerosol population in summer. Profiles analysed with potential temperature as vertical coordinate revealed characteristic variability patterns due to different balances of supply and removal of rBC in specific levels of the stable atmosphere. Kinematic back–trajectories were used to investigate transport pathways into these levels. The lower polar dome was influenced by low–level transport from sources within the cold central and marginal Arctic. During the spring campaign, a cold air outbreak over eastern Europe additionally caused northward transport of air from a corridor over western Russia to Central Asia that was affected by emissions from gas flaring, industrial activity and wildfires. This caused rBC concentrations between about 500 to 1800 m altitude to gradually increase from 32 to 49 ng m−3. The temporal development of transport to the level above, at around 2500 m, caused the initially low concentration to increase from
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".